This invention relates generally to pet collars, and more particularly to collars of the type that incorporate some form of force-release mechanism which enbles the animal to free itself in the event that the collar becomes entangled in tree branches, stumps, fence posts, or the like.
In the past, the widespread use of conventional pet collars has presented serious hazards to the animals, particularly in rural or wooded areas where they were often allowed to roam for extended lengths of time, usually unattended. There have occurred a number of accidental stranglings caused by such collars becoming caught on a tree branch or other object. Collars of the type known as "choke collars" presented even greater risks to the animal, since such devices would tend to tighten if the animal became caught and attempted to free itself.
In an effort to reduce the likelihood of injury or death to the animal, some owners have taken to removing the collar completely prior to releasing the animal or allowing him to roam. This practice has several disadvantages. Under such circumstances, the license that is supposed to accompany the pet is removed with the collar, and in the event that the animal is picked up or becomes lost, there is no way of determining who the owner is. Also, in many areas, it is against the law to allow a pet to roam unattended, or without a license or tag.
An alternative to removing the collar is to provide some sort of safety coupling which can release upon the collar experiencing a tensile force in excess of a predetermined amount, as when the pet becomes caught.
A number of prior patents show force-release collars of one type or another. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 3,994,265 illustrates a collar for cats, wherein there is provided a ball-and-socket relese-type fastener for the collar, the socket part being resilient and capable of being sprung so as to release the ball in the event that excessive force is applied to the fastener. This particular arrangement included a turn-buckle which inactivated the release function, such that the owner could maintain positive control of the animal if it was desired to use the collar with a leash.
Another construction is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 3,589,341, which shows a cat collar incorporating a two-part buckle having concealed permanent magnets in each part, such that when the buckle parts are assembled together there is provided a smooth exposed surface that resists the tendency for the buckle to become caught on tree branches or other objects. The magnets can separate to release the buckle if excessive force is applied to the collar.
Yet another collar is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 2,612,139. This construction is somewhat similar to the first-mentioned patented device discussed briefly above, in that a simple ball and socket fastener is provided. The socket is constituted as a split bushing presenting three spring fingers which yieldably retain the ball, and which can be sprung radially outwardly to release it in the event that excessive force is applied to the collar.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,091,766 shows a rather complex multi-layer collar incorporating a pocket for storing an identifying tag or license, a layer of reflective material applied to the collar, and a releasable fastener of the Velcro type. The hazards of conventional collars are discussed in this patent, and the releasable feature of the collar that is described has been found to sufficiently reduce the hazards, according to the inventor.
Modifications of a conventional choke collar that is widely used with pets are shown in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,011,478 and 2,614,533. The latter patent involves a multi-chain arrangement which operates to apply pressure to the underside of the dog's neck which, the inventor has indicated, is the most sensitive area for applying a control pressure to the animal.
The second patent, U.S. Pat. No. 3,011,478, shows a modified choke collar incorporating a buckle constituted as a ring, and a cooperable spiral spring detent which can pass through the ring if the detent is sprung and which will enable the animal to free itself in the event that it becomes caught on a branch or post. In addition, the collar can be adapted for use as a conventional choke collar, if desired, such modification, however, defeating the safety features of the device.
While the above arrangements operated in a generally satisfactory manner, it became apparent that a number of distinct drawbacks to the various constructions discussed above existed. Such drawbacks may have contributed to the lack of wide acceptance of the devices that have been developed up to the present date.
Many of the safety collars shown in the above patents were subject to inadvertent release at inappropriate occasions, that is, at times during which the animal was under the control of the owner. For instance, in the event that the pet gave a sudden "tug" at the leash, there was a good possibility that the collar would release, thus freeing the animal and exposing it to possible danger from passing vehicles or from other pets in the area. This was true of the collars of U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,011,478 and 4,091,766. Also, the inconvenience to the owner, as well as his personal liability, had to be considered, if the animal inadvertently broke loose at an inopportune time.
With the device of U.S. Pat. No. 3,994,265, there existed the possibility that the pet might be released by the owner, with the collar turnbuckle in the "secure" position, thus completely defeating the safety feature of the device.
In the arrangement shown in U.S. Pat. No. 2,614,533, no safety feature was provided. In the event that the pet inadvertently escaped with the leash still in place, the leash could, again, become caught and possibly cause strangulation.
Thus, to my knowledge there existed no real solution to the problem of providing a reasonably foolproof safety collar which could readily release itself in the event the animal experienced difficulty, yet which would provide adequate retention of the pet when it was held by a leash and under the control of the owner.